From marklbreen at gmail.com Mon Dec 1 03:05:29 2014
From: marklbreen at gmail.com (Mark Breen)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 09:05:29 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
In-Reply-To:
References:
Message-ID:
Hello Jp,
Are you planning on also replacing the 2003 box? If so, I would suggest
1) purchase a new machine and install Win2012
2) install sql 2014 express
3) back up and restore your db
4) forget about it for another 10 years.
if you do not want to purchase an expensive server, just use a pc with 16gb
ram.
if you are really on a budget, use Win 8.1 as the host OS,
regardless, I would not waste hours and risk all sorts of unknown errors in
doing a multi-stage upgrade.
Your time is more valuable and a ?600 machine.
Mark
On 30 November 2014 at 16:27, J- P wrote:
> Hi all, this is a 2 parter
>
> 1.) I have a sqlexpress 2005 database on a 2003 server, as 2003 is nearing
> EOL (as is the hardware ) i *THINK* perhaps this may be a good time to
> upgrade the DB to a newer version ? (any thoughts/suggestions )
>
> Assuming I do upgrade to 2008r2 express, is it better to install a fresh
> 2008express and do a restore of the database via SSMS, or install
> 2005express restore the DB, then install 2008 and let the wizard do the
> upgrade?
>
> 2.) There are a bunch of mtc routines amongst other things I'd like to
> keep/migrate to the new server, is it possible to restore the master DB to
> the new machine? if so is this recommended/advised?
>
> **This is a production server so upgrading to 2008express on the live
> server is not an option**
>
> TIA,
>
> J
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
From jnatola at hotmail.com Mon Dec 1 12:14:27 2014
From: jnatola at hotmail.com (J- P)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 13:14:27 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
In-Reply-To:
References: ,
Message-ID:
Yes the box is being replaced, my concencern is that this custom database was developed in 1997 (started as access)
then went on to sql 2k express then 2005 express, how can i be SURE that it will function under 2014?
I have read (and I'm by no means a DBA) that alot of features were deprecated ,
is there a way to test this?
> From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 09:05:29 +0000
> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
>
> Hello Jp,
>
> Are you planning on also replacing the 2003 box? If so, I would suggest
>
> 1) purchase a new machine and install Win2012
> 2) install sql 2014 express
> 3) back up and restore your db
> 4) forget about it for another 10 years.
>
> if you do not want to purchase an expensive server, just use a pc with 16gb
> ram.
> if you are really on a budget, use Win 8.1 as the host OS,
>
> regardless, I would not waste hours and risk all sorts of unknown errors in
> doing a multi-stage upgrade.
>
> Your time is more valuable and a ?600 machine.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
>
> On 30 November 2014 at 16:27, J- P wrote:
>
> > Hi all, this is a 2 parter
> >
> > 1.) I have a sqlexpress 2005 database on a 2003 server, as 2003 is nearing
> > EOL (as is the hardware ) i *THINK* perhaps this may be a good time to
> > upgrade the DB to a newer version ? (any thoughts/suggestions )
> >
> > Assuming I do upgrade to 2008r2 express, is it better to install a fresh
> > 2008express and do a restore of the database via SSMS, or install
> > 2005express restore the DB, then install 2008 and let the wizard do the
> > upgrade?
> >
> > 2.) There are a bunch of mtc routines amongst other things I'd like to
> > keep/migrate to the new server, is it possible to restore the master DB to
> > the new machine? if so is this recommended/advised?
> >
> > **This is a production server so upgrading to 2008express on the live
> > server is not an option**
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > J
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
From marklbreen at gmail.com Mon Dec 1 12:38:14 2014
From: marklbreen at gmail.com (Mark Breen)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 18:38:14 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
In-Reply-To:
References:
Message-ID:
Hello JP,
there sure is,
1) grab any old windows 8.1 box and install SQL 2014 express on it
2) change your connections strings and test your app against that new temp
machine.
I would expect that you have a very good change that it will work straight
away unless you are using advanced features, DTS etc.
You may be lucky but the other route will also require plenty of luck.
On 1 December 2014 at 18:14, J- P wrote:
> Yes the box is being replaced, my concencern is that this custom database
> was developed in 1997 (started as access)
> then went on to sql 2k express then 2005 express, how can i be SURE that
> it will function under 2014?
>
> I have read (and I'm by no means a DBA) that alot of features were
> deprecated ,
>
> is there a way to test this?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 09:05:29 +0000
> > To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
> >
> > Hello Jp,
> >
> > Are you planning on also replacing the 2003 box? If so, I would suggest
> >
> > 1) purchase a new machine and install Win2012
> > 2) install sql 2014 express
> > 3) back up and restore your db
> > 4) forget about it for another 10 years.
> >
> > if you do not want to purchase an expensive server, just use a pc with
> 16gb
> > ram.
> > if you are really on a budget, use Win 8.1 as the host OS,
> >
> > regardless, I would not waste hours and risk all sorts of unknown errors
> in
> > doing a multi-stage upgrade.
> >
> > Your time is more valuable and a ?600 machine.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 30 November 2014 at 16:27, J- P wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all, this is a 2 parter
> > >
> > > 1.) I have a sqlexpress 2005 database on a 2003 server, as 2003 is
> nearing
> > > EOL (as is the hardware ) i *THINK* perhaps this may be a good time to
> > > upgrade the DB to a newer version ? (any thoughts/suggestions )
> > >
> > > Assuming I do upgrade to 2008r2 express, is it better to install a
> fresh
> > > 2008express and do a restore of the database via SSMS, or install
> > > 2005express restore the DB, then install 2008 and let the wizard do the
> > > upgrade?
> > >
> > > 2.) There are a bunch of mtc routines amongst other things I'd like to
> > > keep/migrate to the new server, is it possible to restore the master
> DB to
> > > the new machine? if so is this recommended/advised?
> > >
> > > **This is a production server so upgrading to 2008express on the live
> > > server is not an option**
> > >
> > > TIA,
> > >
> > > J
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
From jnatola at hotmail.com Mon Dec 1 13:17:24 2014
From: jnatola at hotmail.com (J- P)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 14:17:24 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
In-Reply-To:
References: ,
,
,
Message-ID:
Doing that as we speak,
in so far as bringing over the maintenance routines and logins, is there a way to do it?
the basic routines are , hourly transaction log backups, daily full, weekly integrity
Jean-Paul Natola
> From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 18:38:14 +0000
> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
>
> Hello JP,
>
> there sure is,
>
> 1) grab any old windows 8.1 box and install SQL 2014 express on it
> 2) change your connections strings and test your app against that new temp
> machine.
>
> I would expect that you have a very good change that it will work straight
> away unless you are using advanced features, DTS etc.
>
> You may be lucky but the other route will also require plenty of luck.
>
>
>
>
>
> On 1 December 2014 at 18:14, J- P wrote:
>
> > Yes the box is being replaced, my concencern is that this custom database
> > was developed in 1997 (started as access)
> > then went on to sql 2k express then 2005 express, how can i be SURE that
> > it will function under 2014?
> >
> > I have read (and I'm by no means a DBA) that alot of features were
> > deprecated ,
> >
> > is there a way to test this?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> > > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 09:05:29 +0000
> > > To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> > > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
> > >
> > > Hello Jp,
> > >
> > > Are you planning on also replacing the 2003 box? If so, I would suggest
> > >
> > > 1) purchase a new machine and install Win2012
> > > 2) install sql 2014 express
> > > 3) back up and restore your db
> > > 4) forget about it for another 10 years.
> > >
> > > if you do not want to purchase an expensive server, just use a pc with
> > 16gb
> > > ram.
> > > if you are really on a budget, use Win 8.1 as the host OS,
> > >
> > > regardless, I would not waste hours and risk all sorts of unknown errors
> > in
> > > doing a multi-stage upgrade.
> > >
> > > Your time is more valuable and a ?600 machine.
> > >
> > > Mark
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 30 November 2014 at 16:27, J- P wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all, this is a 2 parter
> > > >
> > > > 1.) I have a sqlexpress 2005 database on a 2003 server, as 2003 is
> > nearing
> > > > EOL (as is the hardware ) i *THINK* perhaps this may be a good time to
> > > > upgrade the DB to a newer version ? (any thoughts/suggestions )
> > > >
> > > > Assuming I do upgrade to 2008r2 express, is it better to install a
> > fresh
> > > > 2008express and do a restore of the database via SSMS, or install
> > > > 2005express restore the DB, then install 2008 and let the wizard do the
> > > > upgrade?
> > > >
> > > > 2.) There are a bunch of mtc routines amongst other things I'd like to
> > > > keep/migrate to the new server, is it possible to restore the master
> > DB to
> > > > the new machine? if so is this recommended/advised?
> > > >
> > > > **This is a production server so upgrading to 2008express on the live
> > > > server is not an option**
> > > >
> > > > TIA,
> > > >
> > > > J
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
From fuller.artful at gmail.com Mon Dec 1 13:32:14 2014
From: fuller.artful at gmail.com (Arthur Fuller)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 14:32:14 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
In-Reply-To:
References:
Message-ID:
Mark,
Manually, copy and paste. tedious for sure. Automatically, Red Gate or
ApexSQL are hard to beat. If you're in a SQL shop then you must have one of
these utility belts. I love them both. In fact, I love them so much that I
consider them a job-requirement. If the client dosen't have them, then I
won't accept the contract withtout one or the other in place. That's that;
no Ifs Ands or Buts. Give me the tools I need to do the job or find another
guy to for around. That's it. There are lots of clients in need of skilled
database experts. Give me the tools I need . At the end of the day, give me
the tools that do the job, or find yourself another db expert.
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:17 PM, J- P wrote:
> Doing that as we speak,
>
> in so far as bringing over the maintenance routines and logins, is there a
> way to do it?
>
> the basic routines are , hourly transaction log backups, daily full,
> weekly integrity
>
>
>
>
> Jean-Paul Natola
>
>
>
>
> > From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 18:38:14 +0000
> > To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
> >
> > Hello JP,
> >
> > there sure is,
> >
> > 1) grab any old windows 8.1 box and install SQL 2014 express on it
> > 2) change your connections strings and test your app against that new
> temp
> > machine.
> >
> > I would expect that you have a very good change that it will work
> straight
> > away unless you are using advanced features, DTS etc.
> >
> > You may be lucky but the other route will also require plenty of luck.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1 December 2014 at 18:14, J- P wrote:
> >
> > > Yes the box is being replaced, my concencern is that this custom
> database
> > > was developed in 1997 (started as access)
> > > then went on to sql 2k express then 2005 express, how can i be SURE
> that
> > > it will function under 2014?
> > >
> > > I have read (and I'm by no means a DBA) that alot of features were
> > > deprecated ,
> > >
> > > is there a way to test this?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> > > > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 09:05:29 +0000
> > > > To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
> > > >
> > > > Hello Jp,
> > > >
> > > > Are you planning on also replacing the 2003 box? If so, I would
> suggest
> > > >
> > > > 1) purchase a new machine and install Win2012
> > > > 2) install sql 2014 express
> > > > 3) back up and restore your db
> > > > 4) forget about it for another 10 years.
> > > >
> > > > if you do not want to purchase an expensive server, just use a pc
> with
> > > 16gb
> > > > ram.
> > > > if you are really on a budget, use Win 8.1 as the host OS,
> > > >
> > > > regardless, I would not waste hours and risk all sorts of unknown
> errors
> > > in
> > > > doing a multi-stage upgrade.
> > > >
> > > > Your time is more valuable and a ?600 machine.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 30 November 2014 at 16:27, J- P wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all, this is a 2 parter
> > > > >
> > > > > 1.) I have a sqlexpress 2005 database on a 2003 server, as 2003 is
> > > nearing
> > > > > EOL (as is the hardware ) i *THINK* perhaps this may be a good
> time to
> > > > > upgrade the DB to a newer version ? (any thoughts/suggestions )
> > > > >
> > > > > Assuming I do upgrade to 2008r2 express, is it better to install a
> > > fresh
> > > > > 2008express and do a restore of the database via SSMS, or install
> > > > > 2005express restore the DB, then install 2008 and let the wizard
> do the
> > > > > upgrade?
> > > > >
> > > > > 2.) There are a bunch of mtc routines amongst other things I'd
> like to
> > > > > keep/migrate to the new server, is it possible to restore the
> master
> > > DB to
> > > > > the new machine? if so is this recommended/advised?
> > > > >
> > > > > **This is a production server so upgrading to 2008express on the
> live
> > > > > server is not an option**
> > > > >
> > > > > TIA,
> > > > >
> > > > > J
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
--
Arthur
From marklbreen at gmail.com Tue Dec 2 03:09:10 2014
From: marklbreen at gmail.com (Mark Breen)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 09:09:10 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
In-Reply-To:
References:
Message-ID:
Hi Arthur,
I agree, I am a subscriber to the redgate toolbelt for 4 years now, would
not be without it.
I participated in the ApexSQL beta testing in the very early years, about
2004 I think.
On 1 December 2014 at 19:32, Arthur Fuller wrote:
> Mark,
>
> Manually, copy and paste. tedious for sure. Automatically, Red Gate or
> ApexSQL are hard to beat. If you're in a SQL shop then you must have one of
> these utility belts. I love them both. In fact, I love them so much that I
> consider them a job-requirement. If the client dosen't have them, then I
> won't accept the contract withtout one or the other in place. That's that;
> no Ifs Ands or Buts. Give me the tools I need to do the job or find another
> guy to for around. That's it. There are lots of clients in need of skilled
> database experts. Give me the tools I need . At the end of the day, give me
> the tools that do the job, or find yourself another db expert.
>
> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 2:17 PM, J- P wrote:
>
> > Doing that as we speak,
> >
> > in so far as bringing over the maintenance routines and logins, is there
> a
> > way to do it?
> >
> > the basic routines are , hourly transaction log backups, daily full,
> > weekly integrity
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jean-Paul Natola
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> > > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 18:38:14 +0000
> > > To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> > > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
> > >
> > > Hello JP,
> > >
> > > there sure is,
> > >
> > > 1) grab any old windows 8.1 box and install SQL 2014 express on it
> > > 2) change your connections strings and test your app against that new
> > temp
> > > machine.
> > >
> > > I would expect that you have a very good change that it will work
> > straight
> > > away unless you are using advanced features, DTS etc.
> > >
> > > You may be lucky but the other route will also require plenty of luck.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 1 December 2014 at 18:14, J- P wrote:
> > >
> > > > Yes the box is being replaced, my concencern is that this custom
> > database
> > > > was developed in 1997 (started as access)
> > > > then went on to sql 2k express then 2005 express, how can i be SURE
> > that
> > > > it will function under 2014?
> > > >
> > > > I have read (and I'm by no means a DBA) that alot of features were
> > > > deprecated ,
> > > >
> > > > is there a way to test this?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> > > > > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 09:05:29 +0000
> > > > > To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello Jp,
> > > > >
> > > > > Are you planning on also replacing the 2003 box? If so, I would
> > suggest
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) purchase a new machine and install Win2012
> > > > > 2) install sql 2014 express
> > > > > 3) back up and restore your db
> > > > > 4) forget about it for another 10 years.
> > > > >
> > > > > if you do not want to purchase an expensive server, just use a pc
> > with
> > > > 16gb
> > > > > ram.
> > > > > if you are really on a budget, use Win 8.1 as the host OS,
> > > > >
> > > > > regardless, I would not waste hours and risk all sorts of unknown
> > errors
> > > > in
> > > > > doing a multi-stage upgrade.
> > > > >
> > > > > Your time is more valuable and a ?600 machine.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 30 November 2014 at 16:27, J- P wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all, this is a 2 parter
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1.) I have a sqlexpress 2005 database on a 2003 server, as 2003
> is
> > > > nearing
> > > > > > EOL (as is the hardware ) i *THINK* perhaps this may be a good
> > time to
> > > > > > upgrade the DB to a newer version ? (any thoughts/suggestions )
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Assuming I do upgrade to 2008r2 express, is it better to install
> a
> > > > fresh
> > > > > > 2008express and do a restore of the database via SSMS, or
> install
> > > > > > 2005express restore the DB, then install 2008 and let the wizard
> > do the
> > > > > > upgrade?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2.) There are a bunch of mtc routines amongst other things I'd
> > like to
> > > > > > keep/migrate to the new server, is it possible to restore the
> > master
> > > > DB to
> > > > > > the new machine? if so is this recommended/advised?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > **This is a production server so upgrading to 2008express on the
> > live
> > > > > > server is not an option**
> > > > > >
> > > > > > TIA,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > J
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > > > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > >
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Arthur
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
From marklbreen at gmail.com Tue Dec 2 03:10:32 2014
From: marklbreen at gmail.com (Mark Breen)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 09:10:32 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
In-Reply-To:
References:
Message-ID:
Hello Jean-Paul,
For the logins and maintenance tasks, if you only have 5 - 10, and about
the same qty of tasks, you could probably do them all by hand in 1 hour.
I do not know a way to automate the maintenance tasks. But usually, this
will be a chance to review them anyway.
On 1 December 2014 at 19:17, J- P wrote:
> Doing that as we speak,
>
> in so far as bringing over the maintenance routines and logins, is there a
> way to do it?
>
> the basic routines are , hourly transaction log backups, daily full,
> weekly integrity
>
>
>
>
> Jean-Paul Natola
>
>
>
>
> > From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 18:38:14 +0000
> > To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
> >
> > Hello JP,
> >
> > there sure is,
> >
> > 1) grab any old windows 8.1 box and install SQL 2014 express on it
> > 2) change your connections strings and test your app against that new
> temp
> > machine.
> >
> > I would expect that you have a very good change that it will work
> straight
> > away unless you are using advanced features, DTS etc.
> >
> > You may be lucky but the other route will also require plenty of luck.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1 December 2014 at 18:14, J- P wrote:
> >
> > > Yes the box is being replaced, my concencern is that this custom
> database
> > > was developed in 1997 (started as access)
> > > then went on to sql 2k express then 2005 express, how can i be SURE
> that
> > > it will function under 2014?
> > >
> > > I have read (and I'm by no means a DBA) that alot of features were
> > > deprecated ,
> > >
> > > is there a way to test this?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > From: marklbreen at gmail.com
> > > > Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2014 09:05:29 +0000
> > > > To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] sqlexpress upgrade
> > > >
> > > > Hello Jp,
> > > >
> > > > Are you planning on also replacing the 2003 box? If so, I would
> suggest
> > > >
> > > > 1) purchase a new machine and install Win2012
> > > > 2) install sql 2014 express
> > > > 3) back up and restore your db
> > > > 4) forget about it for another 10 years.
> > > >
> > > > if you do not want to purchase an expensive server, just use a pc
> with
> > > 16gb
> > > > ram.
> > > > if you are really on a budget, use Win 8.1 as the host OS,
> > > >
> > > > regardless, I would not waste hours and risk all sorts of unknown
> errors
> > > in
> > > > doing a multi-stage upgrade.
> > > >
> > > > Your time is more valuable and a ?600 machine.
> > > >
> > > > Mark
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 30 November 2014 at 16:27, J- P wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi all, this is a 2 parter
> > > > >
> > > > > 1.) I have a sqlexpress 2005 database on a 2003 server, as 2003 is
> > > nearing
> > > > > EOL (as is the hardware ) i *THINK* perhaps this may be a good
> time to
> > > > > upgrade the DB to a newer version ? (any thoughts/suggestions )
> > > > >
> > > > > Assuming I do upgrade to 2008r2 express, is it better to install a
> > > fresh
> > > > > 2008express and do a restore of the database via SSMS, or install
> > > > > 2005express restore the DB, then install 2008 and let the wizard
> do the
> > > > > upgrade?
> > > > >
> > > > > 2.) There are a bunch of mtc routines amongst other things I'd
> like to
> > > > > keep/migrate to the new server, is it possible to restore the
> master
> > > DB to
> > > > > the new machine? if so is this recommended/advised?
> > > > >
> > > > > **This is a production server so upgrading to 2008express on the
> live
> > > > > server is not an option**
> > > > >
> > > > > TIA,
> > > > >
> > > > > J
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> > >
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
From jnatola at hotmail.com Tue Dec 2 10:56:58 2014
From: jnatola at hotmail.com (J- P)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 11:56:58 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Short term consultant
Message-ID:
Hi all,
Please accept my apologies if this request not permitted in this forum
as per my previous post, I have upgraded to sql 2008 and 2014 (in labs) and the database worked fine (barring a few errors that were sorted out quickly).
As far as the post; I'm looking for someone to review a couple of queries (that IMO) seem to be poorly written, the reason i say this is because 6-10 seconds seems rather long to pull up a job spec that doesn't hold all that much data (maybe a page or 2 of info).
Again , please accept my apologies if this etiquette is not permissible in this forum.
And ping me off list if you are interested.
From fhtapia at gmail.com Fri Dec 12 09:26:53 2014
From: fhtapia at gmail.com (fhtapia at gmail.com)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 15:26:53 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Short term consultant
References:
Message-ID:
JP,
I don't know if you received any bites on your offer, but I wanted to
extend that you can receive help on this email forum too if you post
examples of what the queries look like. I'm sure someone here will be able
to help.
On Tue Dec 02 2014 at 8:57:56 AM J- P wrote:
> Hi all,
> Please accept my apologies if this request not permitted in this forum
>
>
> as per my previous post, I have upgraded to sql 2008 and 2014 (in labs)
> and the database worked fine (barring a few errors that were sorted out
> quickly).
> As far as the post; I'm looking for someone to review a couple of queries
> (that IMO) seem to be poorly written, the reason i say this is because 6-10
> seconds seems rather long to pull up a job spec that doesn't hold all that
> much data (maybe a page or 2 of info).
> Again , please accept my apologies if this etiquette is not permissible in
> this forum.
>
> And ping me off list if you are interested.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
From darryl at whittleconsulting.com.au Sun Dec 14 16:44:53 2014
From: darryl at whittleconsulting.com.au (Darryl Collins)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 22:44:53 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Short term consultant
In-Reply-To:
References:
Message-ID:
Yep, that would be where I would start.
Try to post the SQL code or Sproc. Ideally with a small sample (a few rows) of the data if possible.
-----Original Message-----
From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of fhtapia at gmail.com
Sent: Saturday, 13 December 2014 2:27 AM
To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Short term consultant
JP,
I don't know if you received any bites on your offer, but I wanted to extend that you can receive help on this email forum too if you post examples of what the queries look like. I'm sure someone here will be able to help.
On Tue Dec 02 2014 at 8:57:56 AM J- P wrote:
> Hi all,
> Please accept my apologies if this request not permitted in this forum
>
>
> as per my previous post, I have upgraded to sql 2008 and 2014 (in
> labs) and the database worked fine (barring a few errors that were
> sorted out quickly).
> As far as the post; I'm looking for someone to review a couple of
> queries (that IMO) seem to be poorly written, the reason i say this is
> because 6-10 seconds seems rather long to pull up a job spec that
> doesn't hold all that much data (maybe a page or 2 of info).
> Again , please accept my apologies if this etiquette is not
> permissible in this forum.
>
> And ping me off list if you are interested.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
_______________________________________________
dba-SQLServer mailing list
dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
http://www.databaseadvisors.com
From jnatola at hotmail.com Thu Dec 18 10:24:32 2014
From: jnatola at hotmail.com (J- P)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 11:24:32 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Short term consultant
In-Reply-To:
References: ,
,
Message-ID:
Right now is the busiest time of the year (its a lighting company) so until Jan everything is on hold.
I did find out that its the VBA code that causes the most pain or so they tell me.
just a quick example;
if a job starts on 1st of the month, and ends on the 2nd (2 day job) the forms load quicker because its checking/calculating to see (among many other things) how many jobs are utilizing a particular inventory item in the 2 days this job is scheduled;
and the inverse applies as well, if a job starts on the 1st and ends on the 20th, now its checking how many jobs are utilizing the inventory item over a span of 20 days, thus the "calculating" takes 10 times as long.
I will be back after the holidays, and thanks
> From: darryl at whittleconsulting.com.au
> To: dba-sqlserver at databaseadvisors.com
> Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2014 22:44:53 +0000
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Short term consultant
>
> Yep, that would be where I would start.
>
> Try to post the SQL code or Sproc. Ideally with a small sample (a few rows) of the data if possible.
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of fhtapia at gmail.com
> Sent: Saturday, 13 December 2014 2:27 AM
> To: Discussion concerning MS SQL Server
> Subject: Re: [dba-SQLServer] Short term consultant
>
> JP,
> I don't know if you received any bites on your offer, but I wanted to extend that you can receive help on this email forum too if you post examples of what the queries look like. I'm sure someone here will be able to help.
>
> On Tue Dec 02 2014 at 8:57:56 AM J- P wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> > Please accept my apologies if this request not permitted in this forum
> >
> >
> > as per my previous post, I have upgraded to sql 2008 and 2014 (in
> > labs) and the database worked fine (barring a few errors that were
> > sorted out quickly).
> > As far as the post; I'm looking for someone to review a couple of
> > queries (that IMO) seem to be poorly written, the reason i say this is
> > because 6-10 seconds seems rather long to pull up a job spec that
> > doesn't hold all that much data (maybe a page or 2 of info).
> > Again , please accept my apologies if this etiquette is not
> > permissible in this forum.
> >
> > And ping me off list if you are interested.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > dba-SQLServer mailing list
> > dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> > http://www.databaseadvisors.com
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
From fuller.artful at gmail.com Sat Dec 27 12:13:54 2014
From: fuller.artful at gmail.com (Arthur Fuller)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2014 13:13:54 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Opinions invited: question about normalization
Message-ID:
I have in development an app that is intended for use by agencies that use
a lot of volunteers. My initial design was fully normalized (by which I
mean I went to 5NF not just petty 3NF), but this posed significant problems
on the design of the FE, which is web-based. This means that attached to
the Volunteers table are several child tables, each of which connects to a
lookup table, and each of which child could have several rows. For example,
consider Languages-Spoken, easy enough in itself, point to a lookup table
listing languages, present a combo-box and that's that. But now we add
Skills (Driver, Cook, Visits, etc.), and now just with these two lists,
it's already complex: I need a Russian-speaking volunteer who can also
serve as a Driver or Cook, say.
That leads to complex queries that eventually involve nested Having
predicates, and that is tough to implement in a UI that recognizes that
most of its users are, not to cast aspersions, but let's face it, a lot of
users in this category are going to have problems with the intricacies of
ANDs and ORs.
So I was thinking that there's another design strategy in which all the
lookup tables are folded into a single table, with an identifier that
describes the domain (i.e. languages spoken, skills offered, fields of
interest, etc.), the point being that a successive number of predicates
could be assembled from a single table, thus avoiding the complexities of
multi-table queries.
I know that this design violates virtually everything Dr. Codd has written,
but he was after all a mere demi-god, and as problems have progressed and
products such as NoSQL have emerged, I've begun to doubt propositions I
formerly held absolute. Disk space is cheap, speed is abundant, and (well
not in my particular case) databases are expanding to billions of rows.
Any thoughts, my friends?
--
Arthur
From ssharkins at gmail.com Mon Dec 29 10:24:32 2014
From: ssharkins at gmail.com (Susan Harkins)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 11:24:32 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Opinions invited: question about normalization
Message-ID:
I remember Ken Getz discussing normalization in the early days and I don't
want to quote, but he pretty much said if normalization gets in the way --
becomes a hindrance -- it's Okay to break the rules. :)
But seriously -- why does it matter how many lookup tables you have? They
populate one field and that's easy to maintain, even if you have dozens of
them.
Susan H.
On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Arthur Fuller
wrote:
> I have in development an app that is intended for use by agencies that use
> a lot of volunteers. My initial design was fully normalized (by which I
> mean I went to 5NF not just petty 3NF), but this posed significant problems
> on the design of the FE, which is web-based. This means that attached to
> the Volunteers table are several child tables, each of which connects to a
> lookup table, and each of which child could have several rows. For example,
> consider Languages-Spoken, easy enough in itself, point to a lookup table
> listing languages, present a combo-box and that's that. But now we add
> Skills (Driver, Cook, Visits, etc.), and now just with these two lists,
> it's already complex: I need a Russian-speaking volunteer who can also
> serve as a Driver or Cook, say.
>
> That leads to complex queries that eventually involve nested Having
> predicates, and that is tough to implement in a UI that recognizes that
> most of its users are, not to cast aspersions, but let's face it, a lot of
> users in this category are going to have problems with the intricacies of
> ANDs and ORs.
> So I was thinking that there's another design strategy in which all the
> lookup tables are folded into a single table, with an identifier that
> describes the domain (i.e. languages spoken, skills offered, fields of
> interest, etc.), the point being that a successive number of predicates
> could be assembled from a single table, thus avoiding the complexities of
> multi-table queries.
>
> I know that this design violates virtually everything Dr. Codd has written,
> but he was after all a mere demi-god, and as problems have progressed and
> products such as NoSQL have emerged, I've begun to doubt propositions I
> formerly held absolute. Disk space is cheap, speed is abundant, and (well
> not in my particular case) databases are expanding to billions of rows.
>
> Any thoughts, my friends?
>
> --
> Arthur
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
From gustav at cactus.dk Mon Dec 29 10:26:00 2014
From: gustav at cactus.dk (Gustav Brock)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 16:26:00 +0000
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Opinions invited: question about normalization
Message-ID:
Hi Arthur
I think you are mixing two very different aspects here: User interface and filtering method.
Having multiple "and" or multiple "or" is not so difficult, but mixing and/or is. I don't think there's an universally perfect method, it depends on your application.
As for your search techniques, maybe some of the new BI systems can be of help if you can define the volunteers' properties as dimensions.
For a project, I found that copying the normalized data to (nearly) flat search tables was quite effective while keeping the "true" data in the original structure. This also allows for an easy (though not instantaneous) complete rebuild of the search tables from scratch. It was done in SQL Server, no fancy tools.
/gustav
-----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
Fra: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] P? vegne af Arthur Fuller
Sendt: 27. december 2014 19:14
Til: Peter Brawley
Emne: [dba-SQLServer] Opinions invited: question about normalization
I have in development an app that is intended for use by agencies that use a lot of volunteers. My initial design was fully normalized (by which I mean I went to 5NF not just petty 3NF), but this posed significant problems on the design of the FE, which is web-based. This means that attached to the Volunteers table are several child tables, each of which connects to a lookup table, and each of which child could have several rows. For example, consider Languages-Spoken, easy enough in itself, point to a lookup table listing languages, present a combo-box and that's that. But now we add Skills (Driver, Cook, Visits, etc.), and now just with these two lists, it's already complex: I need a Russian-speaking volunteer who can also serve as a Driver or Cook, say.
That leads to complex queries that eventually involve nested Having predicates, and that is tough to implement in a UI that recognizes that most of its users are, not to cast aspersions, but let's face it, a lot of users in this category are going to have problems with the intricacies of ANDs and ORs.
So I was thinking that there's another design strategy in which all the lookup tables are folded into a single table, with an identifier that describes the domain (i.e. languages spoken, skills offered, fields of interest, etc.), the point being that a successive number of predicates could be assembled from a single table, thus avoiding the complexities of multi-table queries.
I know that this design violates virtually everything Dr. Codd has written, but he was after all a mere demi-god, and as problems have progressed and products such as NoSQL have emerged, I've begun to doubt propositions I formerly held absolute. Disk space is cheap, speed is abundant, and (well not in my particular case) databases are expanding to billions of rows.
Any thoughts, my friends?
--
Arthur
From fuller.artful at gmail.com Mon Dec 29 11:04:28 2014
From: fuller.artful at gmail.com (Arthur Fuller)
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2014 12:04:28 -0500
Subject: [dba-SQLServer] Opinions invited: question about normalization
In-Reply-To:
References:
Message-ID:
First of all, thanks for your inputs and suggestions. While awaiting same,
I have plogged along on my own and devised a tentative scenario.
First, some basics that describe the domain (and granted these may describe
only the Canadian version of democracy in practice).
1. We have Electoral Districts, and they exist at two levels, called
Federal and Provincial. These districts map in parallel 99% of the time.
2. Here in Canada, we have three significant political parties and a couple
of others.
3. The individual candidates tend to work on their own, They rely on a team
of Volunteers -- "fellow-travellers" willing to donate their time and
effort toward the larger cause.
4. Candidates and/or staff relegate tasks to the available Volunteers, who
may in turn be collected into Crews: a) Canvass (That means door-knocking);
Sign Crews (that means delivering signs for either window or lawn or
possibly both, and there's a further wrinkle, because there has recently
emerged in which lawn-signs in particular have been damaged, defaced or
outright destroyed, and we need to keep track of these incidences.)
5. Street Addresses are in themselves problematic. There's no simple
division between odd or even. There's no simple way to deduce the address
from a street number, but on the other hand, the list of addresses is
delivered by the government, and issues of trust aside, the "facts of real
estate" imply that since the last census was performed, several condos have
been built and inhabited, and these inhabitants are not on our immediate
Voters' List. So the app has to include a way to insert rows into our
mobile database, and upon return to HQ, upload said inserts into our HQ
database.
6. Alpha Anywhere solves all of these problems in a single stroke. That is
why I have bet my future on this technology. I ought to state this more
precisely: I have no financial interest in Alpha Software. I have never
received a penny from Alpha. I have simply viewed what the software
delivers, and in the course of numerous emails, become friends with Richard
and Selwyn. I have never met either, but I have learned that two of my role
models, Dan Bricklin and Adam Green, are working with the Alpha team, and
this makes me immensely happy.
and delegate tasks and responsibilities on an ad-hoc basis.
On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Gustav Brock wrote:
> Hi Arthur
>
> I think you are mixing two very different aspects here: User interface and
> filtering method.
>
> Having multiple "and" or multiple "or" is not so difficult, but mixing
> and/or is. I don't think there's an universally perfect method, it depends
> on your application.
>
> As for your search techniques, maybe some of the new BI systems can be of
> help if you can define the volunteers' properties as dimensions.
> For a project, I found that copying the normalized data to (nearly) flat
> search tables was quite effective while keeping the "true" data in the
> original structure. This also allows for an easy (though not instantaneous)
> complete rebuild of the search tables from scratch. It was done in SQL
> Server, no fancy tools.
>
> /gustav
>
> -----Oprindelig meddelelse-----
> Fra: dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:
> dba-sqlserver-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] P? vegne af Arthur Fuller
> Sendt: 27. december 2014 19:14
> Til: Peter Brawley
> Emne: [dba-SQLServer] Opinions invited: question about normalization
>
> I have in development an app that is intended for use by agencies that use
> a lot of volunteers. My initial design was fully normalized (by which I
> mean I went to 5NF not just petty 3NF), but this posed significant problems
> on the design of the FE, which is web-based. This means that attached to
> the Volunteers table are several child tables, each of which connects to a
> lookup table, and each of which child could have several rows. For example,
> consider Languages-Spoken, easy enough in itself, point to a lookup table
> listing languages, present a combo-box and that's that. But now we add
> Skills (Driver, Cook, Visits, etc.), and now just with these two lists,
> it's already complex: I need a Russian-speaking volunteer who can also
> serve as a Driver or Cook, say.
>
> That leads to complex queries that eventually involve nested Having
> predicates, and that is tough to implement in a UI that recognizes that
> most of its users are, not to cast aspersions, but let's face it, a lot of
> users in this category are going to have problems with the intricacies of
> ANDs and ORs.
>
> So I was thinking that there's another design strategy in which all the
> lookup tables are folded into a single table, with an identifier that
> describes the domain (i.e. languages spoken, skills offered, fields of
> interest, etc.), the point being that a successive number of predicates
> could be assembled from a single table, thus avoiding the complexities of
> multi-table queries.
>
> I know that this design violates virtually everything Dr. Codd has
> written, but he was after all a mere demi-god, and as problems have
> progressed and products such as NoSQL have emerged, I've begun to doubt
> propositions I formerly held absolute. Disk space is cheap, speed is
> abundant, and (well not in my particular case) databases are expanding to
> billions of rows.
>
> Any thoughts, my friends?
>
> --
> Arthur
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dba-SQLServer mailing list
> dba-SQLServer at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/dba-sqlserver
> http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>
>
--
Arthur